Re: reification test case

On 2002-02-04 17:23, "ext Dan Connolly" <connolly@w3.org> wrote:

> On Mon, 2002-02-04 at 07:12, Jeremy Carroll wrote:
>> My vote: no.
> 
> I vote yes.
> 
> This is what "triple" means, after all, no?
> if x=xx, y=yy, z=zz, then (x,y,z)=(xx,yy,zz), no?

But a bNode of type rdf:Statement is not a triple, it
is the reification of a triple to which can be added
additional knowledge such as authority, source, scope,
etc.

Whether two reification bNodes describe the same triple
does not necessarily mean that other properties ascribed
to each of those bNodes individually apply to all bNodes
reifying the same triple.

> 
> | There is a set called Statements, each element of which is a
> | triple of the form
> |
> | {pred, sub, obj}
> -- http://www.w3.org/TR/1999/REC-rdf-syntax-19990222/#model
> 
> If we're not going to take the implications of reification
> seriously, let's just throw it out.

I think that the point of this discussion is to take it
seriously -- by trying to come to a consensus about what
it is and how it works (or should work) in RDF.

Just because others may view it differently does not mean
they are not taking it as seriously.

Patrick


> 
>>> -----Original Message-----
>>> Does
>>>>  <stmt1> <rdf:type>      <rdf:Statement> .
>>>>  <stmt1> <rdf:subject>   <subject> .
>>>>  <stmt1> <rdf:predicate> <predicate> .
>>>>  <stmt1> <rdf:object>    <object> .
>>>> 
>>>>  <stmt2> <rdf:type>      <rdf:Statement> .
>>>>  <stmt2> <rdf:subject>   <subject> .
>>>>  <stmt2> <rdf:predicate> <predicate> .
>>>>  <stmt2> <rdf:object>    <object> .
>>>> 
>>>>  <stmt1> <property>      <foo> .
>>>> 
>>>>  entail:
>>>> 
>>>>  <stmt2> <property>      <foo> .
>>> 
>>> 
>>> Brian

--
               
Patrick Stickler              Phone: +358 50 483 9453
Senior Research Scientist     Fax:   +358 7180 35409
Nokia Research Center         Email: patrick.stickler@nokia.com

Received on Monday, 4 February 2002 11:37:44 UTC